Chandler--no disagreement that people have to work, and many take jobs that are less than pleasant in order to provide for their family. But there are two differences here. First, we are talking about teachers, who have a bachelor's degree and a teaching credential, so we're not talking about people who have to work on an assemblyline. Second, we are talking about how to motivate people who are already in their job to do better. It is at that point that the research shows that pay is the 11th most important factor in job satisfaction--the article by Herzberg. His conclusion--reached in 1968--is that achievement, recognition, the work itself, and a greater sense of responsibility are the four most important factors in job satisfaction. The closest to mrgybe's bias is the opportunity for advancement--which is the fifth most important factor.

The second question is how you motivate, and evaluate, teacher's potential for advancement. I have worked with 2 master teachers, one a specialist in reading and another a specialist in spelling. When the spelling specialist gave a lecture to the fifth grade class I was volunteering in, the kids were spellbound and there were about 8 teachers in the audience--during their free time. The manner in which the teacher engaged the kids, and the organizational skill with which she brought the material to a coherent picture was simply stunning.

When I began working with kids who were behind in reading, I would observe the reading recovery teacher so my efforts were part of a team effort. My observations, and his suggestions, and outside reading, all made me a better teacher. Not all teachers do this, but many do, and many who I thought ineffectual at first do very well with both struggling kids and classroom control. I have never met a teacher who was satisfied that we are doing enough about the achievement gap--or any who knew precisely what to do. But I see the best each year in the Public Education Foundation luncheon, and try to pick up tips.

This point is lost on both conservatives and those in regulatory agencies: there are three ways to get people to do things:

--you can threaten them with adverse consequences if they don't do it;
--you can bribe them to do it;
--you can organize work (some work) so they do it because they enjoy it or it is in their best interest.

Virtually all management training makes it clear that the third method is preferable. People who are threatened are resentful, and won't obey if they are not being watched. (Duh). People whose only interest is money won't do it unless they are bribed. But the best work comes from people who enjoy the intrinsic value of the work itself. Mrgybe's suggested evaluation system combined one and two, and ignored the most effective method. It also neglected the sad truth that collecting enough data to have defensible criteria for firing is essentially impossible with the data we now collect. If he read any of the various works I've cited, and had a working knowledge of statistics and what is statistically significant, he would know this.

If the people are told there will be drug testing, no tattoos, no TV's, no Cell phones, No soda, only organic food and a homeless shelter, if they collect welfare, Those same people would find a way to acheive thier dreams.

Some of the greatest people I know were no well educated. They were immigrants. They had too much self esteem to take a wefare check. They worked in the fields. They didn't need fat lazy liberal teachers to tell them they were victims. They just worked it out on their own.

A cornerstone of student achievement is school stability, a goal that includes keeping consistent teaching staff that collaborates and offers students a steady learning experience whether in elementary or high school.

But a new report shows about 100 Chicago schools lose more than a quarter of their staff every year, crippling efforts to create an effective learning environment for children in largely African-American schools. The study by the Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago highlights a national concern over how to keep good teachers in tough environments.

With turnover plaguing the schools, and as the article says, crippling efforts, what we really need is more conflict among the teacher ranks and a poorly conceived system to fire another 10%. Tell me again about the high Chicago teacher salaries and how that is sufficient motivation--if they just weren't lazy, like poor people. And then tell me about the rabbits again.

Fact free universe!! These are the facts.......30,000 teachers walked off the job for eight days, leaving 350,000 kids to fend for themselves in one of the most crime ridden cities in the country. This is how CNN summarized the outcome:

In all, teachers appear to have come out ahead in a strike that gained nationwide attention, said Robert Bruno, a professor of labor and employment relations at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and director of its Labor Education Program in Chicago. Across the board, on every issue, the teachers got a more favorable outcome than the school system," he said Wednesday.

The deal, which still must be ratified by the union's overall membership, calls for an average raise of 17.6% over four years, down from the 30% initially sought by the union. But it also strips out a merit pay program that would have been tied to increased emphasis on student test scores. That emphasis remains in the contract -- it's mandated by state law -- but scores will count for a lower percentage of teacher evaluations. The district had wanted scores to count for as much as 45% of evaluations. It will count for no more than 30%, according to the deal.

Teachers also managed to hold the line on health insurance increases, and protect seniority pay increases and raises for additional education that the school system wanted to limit or eliminate.

Every item compensation related. Yet we are to believe that compensation is not important to teachers. Give me a break.

What we do not know is how many of these teachers would quit if they did not receive this "compensation" package. What we do not know is how many of these teachers are members of the union because that is the only way they can teach.

My view is that the collective bargaining process distorts the goals of an individual employee. These unions have a tremendous influence on their members. If a teacher disagrees with abandoning the classroom during a strike, they have no option except to quit teaching. Many go along for the ride...why fight it?

Neither the turnover problem or the 40 years of advances in mangement penetrated the fact-free universe. Hatred of unions spews from Virginia--and his buddies at Chevron may be indicted for bypassing the pollution monitoring devices at their Richmond refinery.

I am perfectly comfortable that I did not spend my career in an industry that spews contaminants into the air--and lies about the consequences. Good choice mac.

I have to say that I have a problem with public employees organizing into unions. Unions can have a very large influence on the election and selection of the politicians who become the bosses of these employees. This influence distorts the employer/employee relationship.

Does this mean I have a hatred of unions in general? Not really. I do recognize the history of abuses by employers in the past. At this time, however, I don't see these abuses by industry as a reason public employees need to organize.

30,000 teachers walked off the job for eight days ... the teachers got a more favorable outcome than the school system ...average raise of 17.6% ... strips out a merit pay program that would have been tied to increased emphasis on student test scores ... lower percentage of teacher evaluations ... health insurance increases ... seniority pay increases and raises for additional education[/i] ... Every item compensation related. Yet we are to believe that compensation is not important to teachers.

Let's see if we have this straight. For having an 8-day street party with no schedules, no cursing kids, and no homework, these teachers were punished by a 17.6% raise, reduced emphasis on performance, and guaranteed continuation of health benefits, seniority pay, and a raise for education courses they might pursue.

THAT'll show 'em!

What did the kids and taxpayers get out of this?
What kind of example did it set?
Where's the part where these teachers must earn those new benefits by performing better?
Why should they make more per month than the median lawyer?
Where are the automatic dismissals for requiring students to sign documents promising to vote Republican for the rest of their lives?
(Oops! My mistake; that was Democrat.)

Let's see, we have one of the highest paid public school systems in the country where there teachers work the shortest day, and then they want to go on strike. Why is this?

As I see it, using standardized testing as a means for measuring teacher performance was THE issue. Crappy test scores = poor evaluation = take a hike.

Actually, I believe there are some serious issues with tying standardized test scores to job performance, but that is another huge issue for another time.

The Chicago teacher were afraid they could lose their jobs if their students did poorly (which they would have) on standardized test, so they strike. The secondary issue was a longer work day, so to counter balance this issue, they wanted more money too. It all makes sense.

Was the strike justified? Not in my opinion, but I know that I would not teach in the system's upper grades for 100K. Little if any teaching and learning going on there because of the intenable situation that is so typical of big inner city systems. The lower grades where the kids are still a bit malleable, yes, I could do the job.

For mrgybe,

Teachers do not go into teaching for the money, but they do want to be recognized for their efforts and success, and the most meaningful way is a pay increase above inflation. Equally important is a written appraisal with appropriate praise that goes into their permanent record. Given the size and bureaucracy of many of the public systems, developing a meaningful and accurate appraisal system is almost impossible. In private schools, it's a piece of cake, primarily because of their size and management principals.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou cannot download files in this forum